Council
of Europe
Conseil
de l´Europe
Project
Education of
Roma Children
in Europe
Roma | History
Austria and Hungary
1850 – 1938
Austria and Hungary
1850 - 1938
4.1
compiled by the editors
Austro-Hungarian Empire | Austria | Hungary
More and more regulations within the monarchy restricted the Roma’s opportunities to earn
a living. Bans on travelling were followed by settling by force, large-scale registration and bans
on certain professions. Economic difficulties and National Socialist propaganda aggravated the
situation, and finally “forced labour, deportation and sterilisation” were to solve the “Gypsy
question” with a “National Socialist solution”.
Roma population
in Burgenland in 1927
Neusiedl
The rigorous census allowed for a continuous,
close watch of virtually every single person of
Roma ethnicity.
Ill. 1 (based upon Mayerhofer 1988, p. 40)
Mörbisch
Mattersburg
E U R O P E
AUSTRIA
Hungary
BURGENLAND 
1 - 9 persons
Oberpullendorf
10 - 49 persons
50 - 99 persons
100 - 200 persons
200 - 289 persons
Introduction
Oberwart
Güssing
Rax
The “Gypsy policy” of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was determined by restrictions.
Bans on travelling, settling by force, bans
and deportation continued a tradition of
expulsion and repression which had lasted
for centuries – the starting point being the
Roma’s first arrival in Central Europe.
The influx of groups of Roma
coming from the east and southeast
mainly into Hungary, was perceived as an “invasion” and led to seri-
ous problems between Roma and nonRoma. When the Austrian government
closed the Hungarian border to the Roma,
many Roma settled in the very poor parts
of Western Hungary, known today as Burgenland. Thus, conflicts were pre-programmed in the first decades of the 20th
century, which was marked by poverty and war. The “Gypsies” were seen as
a “plague” by the majority population,
and finally as a “question” to which only
one “solution” was possible in the 1930s,
strongly marked by National Socialism.
Austro-Hungarian Empire
Austria
Hungary
Ill. 2
“Putri“ with wooden door, window and chimney, St. Margarethen, Burgenland,
between the wars.
Ill. 3
The homes of the Roma were registered in Burgenland in the 1920s. This hut bears the
number “28” above the left window. The photo was taken approximately in 1926.
Ill. 4
Settlement in Mattersburg, Burgenland, between the wars. The picture shows the three
different designs of dwellings that existed then: left, a plastered and whitewashed
house of clay bricks, in the middle a “putri”, a hut half dug in the earth, half made of
wood, branches and clay, right, a clay-filled, half-timbered building.
Ill. 2 (from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 177)
Ill. 3 (from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 37)
Austro-Hungarian
EMPIRE
From the second half of the 19th century onwards, Roma groups such as the
Lovara, who had originally come from
the Danubian Principalities and were
now mainly working as horse dealers,
came into Hungary from the east. The
more nomadic groups appeared, the
more complaints were registered in the
“comitatuses” (the Hungarian counties).
“Repeated law-breaking” and the lack
of laws helping to deal with this “public
nuisance” led to complaints. From the
point of view of the Hungarian population, the Roma’s immigration was an
“invasion”.
Another reason for complaints
were those regulations of the Hungarian
district laws which obliged the municipalities to find accommodation and supplies for the Roma. In view of the many
Ill. 4 (from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 184)
immigrations, these regulations were a
growing burden for the towns.
In 1907, 28 districts demanded
a standardised way of dealing with the
Roma; the parliament, however, was not
able to find a political solution. Instead,
the problem was transferred to an administrative level. The decisions that were
taken, such as the ban on begging and
forced repatriation to the original country of residence, were in line with the
existing “Gypsy policy”, based on repression and threats.
This Hungarian policy, valid until
1918, aimed at forcing the Roma to settle. The economic structures and means,
however, were not sufficient, and so failure was pre-ordained. The towns could
not offer the Roma the necessary means
for their daily survival, so that they had
to keep up their “Gypsy” way of life in
order to enssure their existence. At the
same time, the prejudices of the majority population and a tendency towards
criminalising the Roma increased, not
least because of publications about
Hungarian law. State and society were
not able or not willing to take purposeful measures with respect to the Roma.
This led to dramatic changes in the Western Hungarian districts (today’s Burgenland): the Austrian government had
tightened the immigration laws in the
second half of the 19th century in order
to stop the Roma’s immigration. At the
same time, it decreed the deportation of
all Hungarian Roma found in Austria. In
combination with the Hungarian prohibition to leave the country, decreed in
Hungary in 1870, this led to a massive
rise in the number of Roma living in the
border districts. These districts did not
have or did not want to give accommodation to the Roma, so the latter were
given worthless plots of land to settle.
This is how the infamous “Gypsy colonies” came into being on the towns’
outskirts. [Ills. 2-4]
Council of Europe
Project Education of Roma Children in Europe
Roma | History
Austria and Hungary
1850 – 1938
4.1
Ill. 5
Family of an itinerant craftsman in front of the tent, between the wars.
Ill. 6
A Rom getting arrested, St. Margarethen, Burgenland, 1934.
Ill. 7
List of male Roma of the village Spitzzicken in Burgenland who were deported
to labour camps mainly in Styria, 1942.
Ill. 5 (from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 184)
Ill. 6 (from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 178)
Austria
The big number of Roma and the economic
backwardness of the Western Hungarian
region made integration impossible. In
view of the difficult economic situation, the
conflict between the Roma and non-Roma
became more and more pronounced.
During World War I, many Roma
served in the army. Women and unfit men
were enlisted to do various works as decreed
by the “Kriegsleistungsgesetz” (army service law). In 1916, all draught animals and
wagons were taken away from the travelling
Roma, and given to the army. Horses, mules
and donkeys could only be bought with a
police permit. With the annexation of the
Burgenland area in 1921, several thousand
Roma came into the newly-founded Republic of Austria. Thus, the Roma could not
be deported anymore, and drastic measures
were taken. Already in 1922, Burgenland’s
Ill. 7 (from Baumgartner 1995, p. 140)
provincial government decreed that all
Roma had to stay in the district they were
living in, and had to be prevented from
travelling. In order to stop new immigration, censuses were carried out and “Gypsy
dwellings” were registered.
In 1926, the finger prints of all
Roma over 14, living in Burgenland, were
taken and later supplemented by a photo. From 1928 onwards, the police of Eisenstadt had a so-called “Zigeunerkartothek” (“Gypsy” card file), which included
entries about 8,000 Roma (names and finger prints). [Ill. 1]
Due to the emerging economic
crisis many Roma, who had worked as
unskilled labourers and travelling craftsmen, got into a situation which made their
daily survival almost impossible. They had
no sources of income anymore, had to beg
and – much to the dislike of the non-Roma
– had to rely on district welfare.
This economic crisis also led to
theft and petty crimes, which in turn ag-
gravated the situation between the Roma
and the rural population. A climate of escalating hostility was the result.
One of the main reasons for the
rising number of crimes committed by
“Gypsies” were – with similarities to
Germany – the new, restrictive regulations. Many records resulted from offences
against the strict registration laws and other
administrative offences. This connection,
however, was not taken into account, as
crime rose among the Roma. [Ill. 6]
On the contrary: police statistics
were used to prove the “Gypsy” ’s “antisocial” behaviour. Their settlements were
perceived as a “cultural shame”, particularly by the media in Burgenland, who,
using a more and more radical language,
fostered hostile behaviour towards the
Roma and demanded that the Burgenland
should quickly be freed from this “plague”,
warning about their “terrifying reproduction”. Several assemblies were held on
how to achieve this. During one of them,
Council of Europe
Roma | History
Project Education of Roma Children in Europe
Austria and Hungary
1850 – 1938
4.1
Ill. 8 (Detail)
Some rules from the memorandum “Die Zigeunerfrage. Denkschrift des Landeshauptmanns für das Burgenland” (The Gypsy Question. Memorandum by
the Head of Government of the Province Burgenland) by Thobias Portschy
(Eisenstadt, 1938):
1. “Sexual intercourse between
Gypsies and Germans constitutes an
offence of racial disgrace.
2. Gypsies are not allowed to attend
the general primary school.
3. Sterilising Gypsies should stop
their reproduction.
4. Searchings of houses and individuals have to be conducted regularly.
5. Gypsy huts (a cultural disgrace)
which took place in Oberwart on January
15, 1933, it was suggested that they “take
them to an island in the Silent Ocean” or
“castrate” them.
Also in Austria the foundation
for the later extermination of the Roma
Hungary
In Hungary we cannot really talk about
a “Gypsy policy” after the break-down
of the empire. The revolutionary transitional government, following Horthy’s
regime, did not really pay attention to
the Roma. The sparse regulations which
were passed during this time mainly aimed at the Roma’s surveillance and were
are to be pulled down, and the Gypsies lodged in labour camp shacks.
6. In the labour camps, the Gypsies
work as closed group.
7. Exercising private professions outside the labour camp is prohibited.
8. Gypsies are not allowed to bear
weapons.
9. Voluntary emigration is promoted.”
(translated from Mayerhofer 1988, p. 43f.)
had been laid in the years and decades
before. The NSDAP’s demand, “having
a Gypsy-free Burgenland”, was nothing
new. Contrary to other politicians of his
time, however, Burgenland’s illegal National Socialist “Gauleiter” (district lea-
der) Thobias Portschy was determined
to put his plan, “eradicating the Gypsy“
through forced labour, deportation and
sterilisation, into practise, thus finding
a “national socialist solution” for the
“problem”. [Ill. 8]
justified by the rising crime rates. Registering travelling Roma, as decreed in
1928, and simultaneous raids in several
districts were a novelty.
The second “Strafrechtsnovelle”
(criminal law amendments), in 1928, included specific measures against so-called “incorrigible criminals”, for instance
transferring such people to labour camps.
These amendments were undoubtedly aimed at the Roma, whose life, however,
was not different from that of other under-
privileged people. In 1931, the Minister
of the Interior decreed that the travelling
professions were almost exclusively forbidden, and that a work permit was only
valid in the district of residence – and
tied to the consent of the district council.
These regulations took away many of the
Roma’s sources of livelihood. A decree
passed in 1938, according to which every
Rom had to be regarded as possibly “suspect”, laid the foundation for persecution
and deportation.
Bibliography
Baumgartner, Gerhard (1987) Sinti und Roma in Österreich. In: Pogrom 130 (6/87), pp. 47-50 | Baumgartner, Gerhard (ed.) (1995) 6x
Österreich. Zur Geschichte und aktuellen Situation der Volksgruppen. Klagenfurt-Celovec: Drava Verlag | Fraser, Angus (1992) The Gypsies.
Oxford / Cambridge: Blackwell | Mayerhofer, Claudia (1988) Dorfzigeuner. Kultur und Geschichte der Burgenland-Roma von der
Ersten Republik bis zur Gegenwart. Wien: Picus Verlag | Szabó, Györgi (1991) Die Roma in Ungarn. Ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte
einer Minderheit in Ost- und Mitteleuropa. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang (Studien zur Tsiganologie und Folkloristik, 5) | Vossen,
Rüdiger (1983) Zigeuner. Roma, Sinti, Gitanos, Gypsies zwischen Verfolgung und Romantisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Ullstein
Council
of Europe
Conseil
de l´Europe
© Council of Europe. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
translated, reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
(CD-Rom, Internet, etc.) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording
or any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior permission in writing from the Publishing Division, Directorate of Communication (F-67075, Strasbourg cedex or [email protected]) http://www.coe.int
project Education of
Roma Children in Europe
http://www.coe.int/education/roma
http://romani.uni-graz.at/romani